Does it make sense to speak of "Universal Consciousness" or "Universal Intelligence"?

[Hegel]

This is a fucking joke right? Unless you ascribe to some form of dualism, consciousness is an emergent property of the brain by definition.

That is simply as far from truth as it possibly can be.

And to say "c. is emergent prop. by def" is getting close to non-sense. I am not going to explain this to you, for others have proven it. Read, e.g. David Chalmers' argument.

Not understanding this you ask how emergent materialism is testable. You then immediately foist on us Hameroff's unsupported microtubule claims. Doesn't it bother you that those claims are impossible to test?

Well, emergent materialism must be testable, if it's science.
But you just seemed to claim it's "by definition". That's bullshit, not science, like ontological proof of God: its Gods def that it exists, so it exists!
So, you found emergent materialism on an ontological, not empirical argument!

If you want me to take emregent materialism seriously as SCIENCE, tell me, how you test your theory.

I suppose you also don't realize that all the microtubule baseless speculation does is attempt to give a materialistic explanation for the rise of emergent consciousness that you are trying to replace.

No. MIcrotubule hypothesis does not take any standpoint as such on the ontological question; it is a theory of material correlates of C. What I wrote was not to claim that quantum-mind implies that emergent materialism is false; what it does is that it gives a way of understanding rationally an alternative viewpoint.

The question was: DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO SPEAK OF UNIVERSAL C. OR UNIVERSAL INTELLIGENCE, not whether there is scientific evidence for it. I have proven only what the opening post asked, nothing more thatn that.

If on the other hand you are claiming that actual computation occurs at the microtubule level, you are suffering from the fallacy of division.

I am not really claiming anything, and certainly
I am not claiming that "actual computation takes place on microtubule level". I think the bulk or of the computations of our mind appear on neuronal level. But that's not all; the basic idea of Penrose is that mind is not exhausted by computation. To begin with, you should read Penrose's work.

Decoherence is a bitch.

Surely, but it does not show that Penrose is wrong. That's a fact, I am sorry.

---

Well, I think the neural level is enough.

Most folks think like that and I am not claiming it ain't possible.

But what bugs me is the dogmatic attitude of many of the proponents of this metaphysics (for that's really what it is). Look how Cato just gave an argument of the form of ontological proof of God for it!

Dogmatism bugs me, that's all. I am not a Believer in anything.

Each time I think that I once created an Artificial Neural Network (fully software based) that, with only some 50 neurons, could perform tomography, I wonder what could be achieved with millions of neurons that are always tweaking their own pathways.

Sure its magic what software can do ... but why should it give rise to awareness? And on what level of complexity, if you dont' believe in conscious thermostats, in case of which you're back in some sort of universal mind stuff.

To me, it seems unnecessary, and the testing of that hypothesis will be far more difficult than the "simple" neural activity.
"proto-consciousness" on all matter? really? I can't wait to see this published!

But a non-testable hypothesis is not science. And thus, the ultimate argument against different views is not that they are not scientific, but that they are too "odd", too far from "common intuition". I think that's always a bad argument knowing what we know about physics, etc.
& I think if I tried to publish it they'd say this has been said a thousand times ... Leibniz was the guy to invent the idea. He was not an idiot. Also the grandfather of computer, btw. Whitehead, David Bohm, etc have given their versions.

---

What myriad of possibilites? Nobody takes seriously ideas similar to the claim that consciousness comes from the pineal gland.

AI is also based on dualism.
What causes somehow magically the consciousness is the non-material algorithmic processes that the brain implements and -- as some believe -- can even in future be downloaded into computer.